geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Bruce Snyder wrote:
> On 12/5/05, Hernan Cunico <hcunico@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>We need to have a strategy on how we are going manage reviewing,
>>>removing out of date content, and moving valid content from the existing
>>>Wiki. A lot of the existing content is out of date or irrelevant. We
>>>need to be careful that we don't end up having two half baked Wikis for
>>>Geronimo.
>>
>>Totally agree, should "focal points" for documentation be identified for
>>gathering/addressing all the doc strategy related stuff? or maybe a
>>structure similar to "contributors and committers" should be in place
>>for documentation!?
>
>
> Hernan, some of us raised this point earlier this year - the notion
> that there will be committers who don't necessarily write code but
> instead write documentation or do other things. I'd like to raise this
> discussion again because, IMO, the ultimate way to write documentation
> is in a format that can be easily converted to just about anything
> else including a wiki. My reason for feeling this way is so that the
> docs are versioned with the code and so that the docs are tracked via
> the same mechanism as the code.
Agree with you with using a format easy to export from and with the
versioning. In addition, using committers will provide a way to control
the content (as with the code) for accuracy, helping to keep the
documentation "official".
We somehow have to be able to guarantee the content is accurate and
updated for a given version. Using contributors/committers would be one
way to achieve this.
>>>Maybe ApacheCon would be a good opportunity to get everyone together and
>>>review the content in the existing Wiki. IMHO, if we don't have
>>
>>Guys, keep in mind that not everybody is going to ApacheCon, pls keep
>>the dev list updated with your discussions on this.
>
>
> No problem here, Hernan. The Apache Way is to do as close to 100% of
> the discussion, decision making, etc. on the mailing lists so that
> nobody is excluded.
Face-to-face discussions are faster, wider and have lots of other
benefits. When writing them, at least in my case, one tries to summarize
the key items (that is a fact) and some times, some details are lost. My
comment meant to be just a "friendly reminder" on the discussions ;)
Cheers!
Hernan
>
> Bruce
> --
> perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
> );'
>
> The Castor Project
> http://www.castor.org/
>
> Apache Geronimo
> http://geronimo.apache.org/
>